[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] parse-datetime: use labs for long int
|
From: |
Pádraig Brady |
|
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] parse-datetime: use labs for long int |
|
Date: |
Sat, 22 Apr 2017 11:34:24 -0700 |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 |
Wow impressive improvements!
On 22/04/17 02:18, Paul Eggert wrote:
> (date): Fix printf of size_t to use %z.
In coreutils we explicitly disallow the C99 %j and %z specifiers
due to portability issues on solaris 8 for example:
http://git.sv.gnu.org/cgit/coreutils.git/commit/?id=v8.23-75-g7d1fe88
In general gnulib is still targeting c89 right?
BTW, when should we update that requirement?
Anyway depending on the printf module would be overkill
to cater for this, so using PRIuMAX may be best?
cheers,
Pádraig
- [PATCH] parse-datetime: use labs for long int, Ruediger Meier, 2017/04/07
- Re: [PATCH] parse-datetime: use labs for long int, Paul Eggert, 2017/04/22
- Re: [PATCH] parse-datetime: use labs for long int, Rüdiger Meier, 2017/04/22
- Re: [PATCH] parse-datetime: use labs for long int,
Pádraig Brady <=
- Re: [PATCH] parse-datetime: use labs for long int, Paul Eggert, 2017/04/22
- Is Gnulib still targeting C89?, Paul Eggert, 2017/04/24
- Re: Is Gnulib still targeting C89?, Tim Rice, 2017/04/26
- Re: Is Gnulib still targeting C89?, Paul Eggert, 2017/04/27
- Re: Is Gnulib still targeting C89?, Tim Rice, 2017/04/27
- Re: Is Gnulib still targeting C89?, Bruno Haible, 2017/04/27
Re: [PATCH] parse-datetime: use labs for long int, Pádraig Brady, 2017/04/22